Pluto Rivals Earth in Geological Complexity

crev.info ^ | 9-14-18 | David F. Coppedge

[fishtank]

Pluto Rivals Earth in Geological Complexity

September 14, 2018 | David F. Coppedge

Call it what you will, Pluto is a planet of surprises. Its active geology is second only to Earth’s, say two planetary scientists.

What were they thinking? (A-hyulk)

There’s another push to re-classify Pluto as a planet. According to Science Daily, Philip Metzger of the University of Central Florida thinks the IAU (International Astronomical Union) thinks they acted a bit goofy when they downgraded Pluto to “dwarf planet” in 2006. They used a “sloppy definition” that a body must “clear its orbit” to be considered a true planet. “They didn’t say what they meant by clearing their orbit,” Metzger retorts. “If you take that literally, then there are no planets, because no planet clears its orbit.”

But Metzger’s preferred definition – a body that is large enough to become spherical in shape – opens the door to classifying all kinds of moons as planets. Surprisingly, that’s OK with Metzger and his colleague Kirby Runyon of Johns Hopkins University. He thinks calling Titan and Ganymede “planets” is “functionally useful,” and has historical precedent, too.

This academic debate means little in the long run. Bodies are what they are, regardless of what humans call them. It just goes to illustrate a philosopher’s critique of taxonomy in science: Do scientists really carve nature at its joints? How arbitrary are human classification schemes? What are the costs and benefits of lumpers and splitters? Do names of reference confuse or enlighten? Is one culture’s classification scheme “better” than another’s?

[Jamestown1630]

It’s a good talk - he makes it all very accessible for those of us who have no real background in astronomy.

[CivilWarBrewing]

Damn, I never thought of that! Good catch.

(But I STILL believe in NIBIRUuuuuu)